What Would a Nation of Sports Gamblers Look Like?

[bittraffic]

Back when I was serious about sports gambling. Efforts were made to use math, science, psychology and other avenues of study towards anticipating the outcome of matches.

Sometimes you can tell how hungry and motivated athletes are going into events simply by watching their interviews and paying close attention to their body language and responses. It is also possible to tell when they're unmotivated and distracted.

When Cain Velasquez fought Francis Ngannou. Cain Velasquez was sweating heavily despite not moving or exerting himself much at the open workout. He looked out of shape or injured. I used that indicator to bet heavily on Ngannou and won. Later it emerged Velasquez had a knee injury and wasn't able to run much to prepare his cardio for that bout. There were other occasions where I tried to use the law of large numbers and other aspects of math, science and strategy to be successful in gambling.

A nation of sports gamblers might study the psychology of sports and cold reading athletes to gauge performance at events. As well as strategy and math for better understanding odds and strategizing. A nation of gamblers wouldn't necessarily have to be a decadent or regressive trend. It could actually encourage people to embrace fields of study which might be useful for being profitable in the industry.

This applies to boxing and MMA but for team sports like soccer or basketball, you may just depend on their best players like Curry, Klay Tom, or Lebron. All the time the pickers spread thier word and often they are right when you look at the odds.

A nation of gamblers would be a nation of irresponsible citizenry. The constant fights that will often come on will be a thing of worry. Take for instance communities where gamblers are much and see the irresponsible living in that community with youngsters not wanting to get proper jobs or do anything meaningful with their lives. Everybody wants to hit it big so they can display their wealth. Morality and communal living will be lost in such nation and people can kill in such communities at the slightest disagreement.

Or would you say a nation of sports gamblers is a competitive citizen?
During Olympics, all I see on the top gold getter are the US, China, Germany, and Russia. I don't see Mexico being the top gold medalist in boxing.

[1715121452]

1715121452

[1715121452]

1715121452

[1715121452]

1715121452

[1715121452]

1715121452

[Daltonik]

Or would you say a nation of sports gamblers is a competitive citizen?
During Olympics, all I see on the top gold getter are the US, China, Germany, and Russia. I don't see Mexico being the top gold medalist in boxing.

After all, Olympic sports require huge support from the state, countries such as Mexico cannot or do not want to provide such support to their national teams, hence the difference in results, but in professional sports the results are somewhat different.

[AicecreaME]

A nation of gamblers would be a nation of irresponsible citizenry. The constant fights that will often come on will be a thing of worry. Take for instance communities where gamblers are much and see the irresponsible living in that community with youngsters not wanting to get proper jobs or do anything meaningful with their lives. Everybody wants to hit it big so they can display their wealth. Morality and communal living will be lost in such nation and people can kill in such communities at the slightest disagreement.

Unfortunately, this makes sense.

Having a nation of gambler could be chaotic. While we could somehow lean on the positive aspects of gambling, we can't really deny the fact that gamblers tend to be greedy and boastful in the long run. I agree with what you said that constant fights could possible happen from time to time because different types of gamblers have different opinions and all of them want to be heard which could lead to some disagreements and fight amongst each other. Since they hold different kinds of beliefs and principles, as well as perspective, it is probable that they'll clash the moment the other try to impose what works for him.

Indeed, everyone's goal will be hitting the jackpot just for the sake of bragging and not really inspiring other gamblers. In fact, this so-called inspirational and motivational posts about winning could be a trap too, for you to bet over and over chasing the winning prize. Without actually knowing how they got there: the process, time, and fund spent altogether.

[TheGreatPython]

I do think that what the government is trying to do is by preventing addiction rather than curing it.

Though this may be the case, I find it too restrictive to the point that there are states that completely prohibit online gambling. But, this kind of problem may easily be remedied by visiting other states and gambling on it. While it may be inconvenient for you, but it relatively solves the issue of complete prohibition done by some states that prohibited gambling.

Again, while I am not in favour of completely prohibiting gambling, I do understand the implication that the government did by making this move.

And like the saying says "prevention is always better than cure" But when someone is already addicted, then curing would be the obvious thing that we can do to get their selves back to normal. Restricting/banning gambling is one of the ways to prevent people from accessing it.

Maybe you are new on gambling that is why you find it too restrictive when some states are prohibited about it but did you know that there are countries where gambling is fully banned? So how about that? I think that is more restrictive. It's true that there are remedies but not all can do it, so this is better than if the government won't take any actions and just watch the public turning into a compulsive gambler.

[Slow death]

I understand that if we wanted a country where it was for gamblers it would be necessary to put strong measures of KYC, the solution to many problems of gambling addicts is in KYC, for example:

the country would force all online or physical casinos to force customers to make KYC right away when creating an account in the case of an online casino and in the case of a physical casino they would have to ask customers for documents at the door of the physical casino

in case someone becomes addicted to gambling that person would have to be banned from gambling for at least 3 years, this means that the hospital would issue a note to all online and physical casinos forbidding and account creation of this addicted person in gambling

with that it could be possible that there was a nation of  sports gamblers

[Maestro75]

A nation of gamblers would be a nation of irresponsible citizenry.

Or would you say a nation of sports gamblers is a competitive citizen?

How will it promote competitive citizenship when we know how angry gamblers get when they lose? That is not possible. Look at what fans of different clubs do to others when their clubs lose, even right there at the soccer pitch. Many people have taken because of this and do not like going to watch live matches to avoid fights that normally erupts. At home, we have heard of wives refusing their husbands food and sex when the teams they support lose to their husbands opposing teams. Where is the competitiveness then?

[Bananington]

At home, we have heard of wives refusing their husbands food and sex when the teams they support lose to their husbands opposing teams. Where is the competitiveness then?

This is too much, and I also don't see how a nation with majority of sport gamblers will promote competition. When different people have a common interest in an activity, it can lead to closer bonds formed. In a country where majority of the people gamble on sports, apart from all the bad it can cause, it also gives everyone a common topic that they can all relate to and foster better relationship. You can notice how easily smokers become friends, even people who drink, that's the same effect it will provide for a nation where majority of people sports gamble.

[freedomgo]

Back when I was serious about sports gambling. Efforts were made to use math, science, psychology and other avenues of study towards anticipating the outcome of matches.

Sometimes you can tell how hungry and motivated athletes are going into events simply by watching their interviews and paying close attention to their body language and responses. It is also possible to tell when they're unmotivated and distracted.

When Cain Velasquez fought Francis Ngannou. Cain Velasquez was sweating heavily despite not moving or exerting himself much at the open workout. He looked out of shape or injured. I used that indicator to bet heavily on Ngannou and won. Later it emerged Velasquez had a knee injury and wasn't able to run much to prepare his cardio for that bout. There were other occasions where I tried to use the law of large numbers and other aspects of math, science and strategy to be successful in gambling.

A nation of sports gamblers might study the psychology of sports and cold reading athletes to gauge performance at events. As well as strategy and math for better understanding odds and strategizing. A nation of gamblers wouldn't necessarily have to be a decadent or regressive trend. It could actually encourage people to embrace fields of study which might be useful for being profitable in the industry.

This applies to boxing and MMA but for team sports like soccer or basketball, you may just depend on their best players like Curry, Klay Tom, or Lebron. All the time the pickers spread thier word and often they are right when you look at the odds.

It's still applicable in soccer, basketball and baseball or in any sports that requires team effort. However, it will be much tougher to analyze the datas available because we are weighing more things unlike in boxing and MMA where we are just comparing two different fighters to know who's who and which is which. Team sports does have many facts to consider as well because if their stars players cannot play due to injury, their fire power will be reduced and will give the opposite team an advantage.

[Maestro75]

You can notice how easily smokers become friends, even people who drink, that's the same effect it will provide for a nation where majority of people sports gamble.

You are right with the smokers example you gave and how they quickly make friends but you have to know that smokers are not braggers. Gamblers are braggers. That is where the difference is. It is very hard for those who brag alot to remain in peace when they meet with those who also brag. This is what happens most times when gamblers meet.

[Yatsan]

At home, we have heard of wives refusing their husbands food and sex when the teams they support lose to their husbands opposing teams. Where is the competitiveness then?

This is too much, and I also don't see how a nation with majority of sport gamblers will promote competition. When different people have a common interest in an activity, it can lead to closer bonds formed. In a country where majority of the people gamble on sports, apart from all the bad it can cause, it also gives everyone a common topic that they can all relate to and foster better relationship. You can notice how easily smokers become friends, even people who drink, that's the same effect it will provide for a nation where majority of people sports gamble.

Competition? I see greed.
As mentioned in this topic, younger generation are also influenced by gambling to the exntent wherein reliance do now exist in their life. It became a culture- as it sounded to me. There's no right or wrong culture for sure but if it is based with greed, I can say that it is just a manifestation of wrongdoings. It is no longer solely to playing or act of gambling but their reliance to the prize from doing so which puts more weigh into such activity, and on the latter, makes them more affected of the outcome.

You can notice how easily smokers become friends, even people who drink, that's the same effect it will provide for a nation where majority of people sports gamble.

You are right with the smokers example you gave and how they quickly make friends but you have to know that smokers are not braggers. Gamblers are braggers. That is where the difference is. It is very hard for those who brag alot to remain in peace when they meet with those who also brag. This is what happens most times when gamblers meet.

I doubt with bragging. Gamblers are also sharing commonalities which makes them good friends, try to observe in a casino. They are all going along at first and things are just changing to worse once it is money which is in the 'middle'. Once there are people losing huge amounts, the tension will change. Far different with the comparison on vices wherein there's no such thing involved; only killing time. So I'm guessing this is quite irrelevant.

[Maestro75]

It is very hard for those who brag alot to remain in peace when they meet with those who also brag. This is what happens most times when gamblers meet.

I doubt with bragging. Gamblers are also sharing commonalities which makes them good friends, try to observe in a casino. They are all going along at first and things are just changing to worse once it is money which is in the 'middle'. Once there are people losing huge amounts, the tension will change.

You said you doubt about gamblers bragging and I said bragging leads to fight. Ok, you agreed that once losing huge amounts is involved there can be fights among gamblers. Whether they brag or not, it is the fights that matter. We need a country that its citizens live in peace, no fights. A gambling nation will be without peace whenever the major or dominating side loses huge amounts.

[panganib999]

I see two things here. The first is that I am surprised that there are a lot of states in the USA where gambling is not legalised. Gambling has its bad things, like alcohol for example, but it is more than proven that by prohibiting it you don't eliminate it, you leave it in the hands of mafias and you stop collecting taxes. And this brings me to the second part, that part of the taxes will be used to help the homeless seems to me to be a poor argument. What we have to do is to attack the root of the problem and try to avoid, or at least reduce the percentage of homeless people.

Then, as for the clothes that people may be wearing, I consider that a secondary issue.

Gambling houses will do whatever they could to gather people in their favor, even if the means they employ to reach is that is of poor taste. To be honest I don't think it would work with the people. The fact that it insinuates that gambling does good is already a flawed concept, let alone that the taxes they incur are being paid to fight homelessness. We take a look at everywhere and it doesn't seem like actions against homelessness is being taken to alleviate it, let alone to completely eradicate the tragedy. This advertisement, if true, is done in poor taste and should be a lesson to every gambling company out there not to.

You also have a point in attacking the homelessness tragedy but without the primary proprietary entities to handle the issue, there wouldn't be an end to people lying in cardboard boxes in the streets. The government needs to be urged, or we could just leave it to the NGOs and watch it gloriously fail because they lack the proper funding.

[bittraffic]

When I read article I was surprised to see that it claims sports betting is more problematic than other kinds. I don't see why. Sports betting happens when there are competitions. But you can gamble 7/24 on online casinos. Sports betting takes amount of experience skill, knowing teams to hit a win etc But other kinds of gambling games are mostly very easy and luck based. So easy to hook. I don't agree with argument.

So many sports pickers these days that some of the gamblers don't even know the game, they just bet based on what YouTubers pick for them.

The article actually branches out to different sub-topics about sports betting but it's a very political article that lets every voter see whichever party wins, the winning party will do no different than the other will do, all lies. The same effect and the same thing, sports betting will continue either in the area or online.

[LUCKMCFLY]

When I read article I was surprised to see that it claims sports betting is more problematic than other kinds. I don't see why. Sports betting happens when there are competitions. But you can gamble 7/24 on online casinos. Sports betting takes amount of experience skill, knowing teams to hit a win etc But other kinds of gambling games are mostly very easy and luck based. So easy to hook. I don't agree with argument.

So many sports pickers these days that some of the gamblers don't even know the game, they just bet based on what YouTubers pick for them.

The article actually branches out to different sub-topics about sports betting but it's a very political article that lets every voter see whichever party wins, the winning party will do no different than the other will do, all lies. The same effect and the same thing, sports betting will continue either in the area or online.

Yes, in fact it is a very clear option that when we make a bet it is like in trading, we ourselves are to blame, we cannot predict exactly what may happen in a sport, but there is something clear, here in sports betting we have more chance to win than to play in a slot machine, because in sports betting our decision is what makes us win or lose and we do not depend on a random system, if luck can be mixed, but it is optional. In the event that I choose a particular sport to bet without a doubt, it is soccer, other sports can be boxing and UFC, in other sports I need to learn, I do not have the experience to face making a bet blindly, it would be losing money.

[bugwaysa]

When I read article I was surprised to see that it claims sports betting is more problematic than other kinds. I don't see why. Sports betting happens when there are competitions. But you can gamble 7/24 on online casinos. Sports betting takes amount of experience skill, knowing teams to hit a win etc But other kinds of gambling games are mostly very easy and luck based. So easy to hook. I don't agree with argument.

So many sports pickers these days that some of the gamblers don't even know the game, they just bet based on what YouTubers pick for them.

The article actually branches out to different sub-topics about sports betting but it's a very political article that lets every voter see whichever party wins, the winning party will do no different than the other will do, all lies. The same effect and the same thing, sports betting will continue either in the area or online.

Yes, in fact it is a very clear option that when we make a bet it is like in trading, we ourselves are to blame, we cannot predict exactly what may happen in a sport, but there is something clear, here in sports betting we have more chance to win than to play in a slot machine, because in sports betting our decision is what makes us win or lose and we do not depend on a random system, if luck can be mixed, but it is optional. In the event that I choose a particular sport to bet without a doubt, it is soccer, other sports can be boxing and UFC, in other sports I need to learn, I do not have the experience to face making a bet blindly, it would be losing money.

You clearly did not made a mistake since you are replying to QueenVera

https://web.archive.org/web/20221125013407/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5418224.20

[LUCKMCFLY]

When I read article I was surprised to see that it claims sports betting is more problematic than other kinds. I don't see why. Sports betting happens when there are competitions. But you can gamble 7/24 on online casinos. Sports betting takes amount of experience skill, knowing teams to hit a win etc But other kinds of gambling games are mostly very easy and luck based. So easy to hook. I don't agree with argument.

So many sports pickers these days that some of the gamblers don't even know the game, they just bet based on what YouTubers pick for them.

The article actually branches out to different sub-topics about sports betting but it's a very political article that lets every voter see whichever party wins, the winning party will do no different than the other will do, all lies. The same effect and the same thing, sports betting will continue either in the area or online.

Yes, in fact it is a very clear option that when we make a bet it is like in trading, we ourselves are to blame, we cannot predict exactly what may happen in a sport, but there is something clear, here in sports betting we have more chance to win than to play in a slot machine, because in sports betting our decision is what makes us win or lose and we do not depend on a random system, if luck can be mixed, but it is optional. In the event that I choose a particular sport to bet without a doubt, it is soccer, other sports can be boxing and UFC, in other sports I need to learn, I do not have the experience to face making a bet blindly, it would be losing money.

You clearly did not made a mistake since you are replying to QueenVera

https://web.archive.org/web/20221125013407/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5418224.20

Hello bugwaysa, yes I answered, but if you look closely I did it in this board of the wrong forum (which does not belong), when they told me this, that was the reason why I deleted it, because I did it and I did not pay attention to what was inside from another thread, if I leave a post from another thread in this thread it is not correct, anyway I apologize for the inconvenience and misunderstanding caused.

[Mauser]

The author is still debating which prop he favors but he drifts to pointing out NY took about a month to become the largest sports-betting market in the country after legalization because online sports-betting companies can immediately roll out their aggressive promotions. Although he is unsure if app-based sports betting is much worse.

It doesn't matter whether you are a sports gamblers who sits in front of a big screen betting on football matches wearing football jerseys and baseball caps they wore backward or the sports gambler who just sits down wearing pajamas at home betting with thier phones. I think it drifted far enough to see what we look like upon deciding on online betting legalization. Wearing a cosplay costume will probably just apply on metaverse if there is ever a possibility of this. Would you wear a costume on Meta?

In my opinion gambling should always be legal in a country. Having a nation wide ban on gambling is wrong as it will never remove gambling complete from society. The only thing that a ban is going to do is shifting it not hiding from the government. Private underground casinos will pop up and still satisfy the demand for gambling and sports betting. The government is missing out on taxes and also will not offer a legal framework for the citizens. It should be every persons choice to decide if he wants to engage in gambling or not. And as long as it's legal a gambler doesn't need to be afraid that he will scammed out of his winnings, he has the law on his side. In my country sports betting is a big market and is part of the culture over here, if politicans would try to ban it then there would be a public outcry. As for the metaverse I think it's the future and will be a big part for people watching sports, betting and engaging with each other while sitting on the couch at home. I would only be wearing a costume in the metaverse if I am getting paid for it. It feels a bit like making a promotion on Facebook or Instagram, as everybody else is going to see you with it. And a company should offer some goodies or monetary reward for people to promote their business.

[Wexnident]

Everybody likes the noble cause and if anyone oppose the Prop27, those guys will really look like a villain in the eyes of the society. The gaming tribes will  definitely look like they are the ones preventing the advancement of the legalization measures. But both party have politicians on thier sides which I guess this is going ot be a numbers game.

To be fair, prop26 is also fighting for a moral reason, which is (from what I understood), limiting the influence of sports betting towards brick and mortar. Letting it spread online makes it easier for younger audiences to touch upon it after all (though considering how the internet has grown, is kind of too late).

The same effect and the same thing, sports betting will continue either in the area or online.

I'd say that's infinitely better than a country-wide ban on gambling. At least it's controlled in a way. Though at this point I'd just say they're fighting for the profits they'd gain, prop27 wins and brick and mortar casinos drop in users, prop26 wins, and online would never even be able to be released.

[ChiBitCTy]

We will know very soon here in the United States.  My state, Illinois, legalized gambling about a year ago. Honestly besides the extra tax income which is great and put to good use (well, some of it) not much has changed here.  There are a shit ton of video poker machines stores allllll over my city, I live in a city of 100k-ish people and I bet we have poker machines set up in at least 4-500 different establishments.

I mostly support the freedom of will.  It's super duper easy to gamble online illegally so why not legalize it and make tax money for the betterment of the city. 

Like marijuana legalization here, gambling legalization has made it a better, more free place.

[Boristhecat]

In my opinion gambling should always be legal in a country. Having a nation wide ban on gambling is wrong as it will never remove gambling complete from society. The only thing that a ban is going to do is shifting it not hiding from the government. Private underground casinos will pop up and still satisfy the demand for gambling and sports betting. The government is missing out on taxes and also will not offer a legal framework for the citizens. It should be every persons choice to decide if he wants to engage in gambling or not. And as long as it's legal a gambler doesn't need to be afraid that he will scammed out of his winnings, he has the law on his side. In my country sports betting is a big market and is part of the culture over here, if politicans would try to ban it then there would be a public outcry. As for the metaverse I think it's the future and will be a big part for people watching sports, betting and engaging with each other while sitting on the couch at home. I would only be wearing a costume in the metaverse if I am getting paid for it. It feels a bit like making a promotion on Facebook or Instagram, as everybody else is going to see you with it. And a company should offer some goodies or monetary reward for people to promote their business.

I agree about the ban - it never solves the problem (if there is one at all) and only worsens things for the people whom the ban is supposed to protect. As for the Metaverse, you argue logically, but corporations have long switched to a model where users do everything themselves and also pay for it themselves, so I would not expect that the development of the Metaverses will take a different path. Of course, 0.001% of all users will receive some kind of compensation for their activity, but the rest will not.